DEPARTMENT OF BUILT ENVIRONMENT
GUIDELINES FOR
PROMOTION, TENURE EVALUATION AND BIENNIAL REVIEW
I.
Overview: Scope and Application
A. Scope of Guidelines
1. This framework is applicable to promotion, tenure evaluation and post tenure
evaluation in the Department of Built Environment and serves as a guide within
which the departmental committees, the department chair, and the department as a
whole will operate.
2. In accordance with general University practice, the evaluation of faculty
performance will focus on three general categories of activity, which are:
a. Teaching effectiveness
b. Research/publication/creative activity
c. Service to the department, to the college, to the University, to the community
and/or to the larger profession
3. Other University Assignments
4. Categories of Activity Weight Ranges
II. Teaching--Evaluative Criteria and Standards of Performance
The department seeks faculty members who are technically knowledgeable and who will
challenge students to be competent and make meaningful contributions to their employers,
field, and profession. Good teachers vary in their classroom behavior, but they all approach
their tasks with state of the art knowledge of their field and genuine concern to produce
technically-competent, professional graduates.
Students should be treated like apprentices in the field. We want our students to work, to
learn basic skills, to understand career progression, and to perform as professionals
concerned with the general welfare of their employer and field.
The department values both the quantity and quality of a colleague's teaching contribution.
Quantity includes contact hours, numbers enrolled, and number of preparations. Also
relevant to the amount of teaching are overload assignments, whether voluntary or
unavoidable. Supervision of internships and service on Master’s and PhD thesis/dissertation
or project committees also will be considered.
Quality of teaching is judged by peers in the department, using clear criteria and sound
judgment. Student course evaluations and classroom observations are indicators required
of all pre-tenured and tenured faculty members. Student evaluations (SIRs) that meet the
department’s, college’s and university’s standards as evaluation instruments should be
utilized in all courses.
Page 1 of 5
Classroom observations will be conducted as least once per academic year by members of
the department's personnel committee and an optional person of the professor’s choosing.
The instructor being observed must be given reasonable (e.g., at least one week) prior
notification regarding the prospects of a classroom visitation. Classroom visitations by
external observers may be employed as needed in special cases, for example, where the
nature of a course's material is such that no one in the department is qualified to serve as an
observer. In all instances, the arrangements for classroom visitations should be mutually
agreeable to both parties. Moreover, the observer will prepare a written report of the
visitation, with copies going to the faculty member and to the faculty member's
departmental personnel file.
Student course evaluations and/or classroom visitations are required as part of the evaluation
package for faculty members applying for tenure or to demonstrate meritorious teaching
effectiveness to the department's committee (post tenure review).
Still other indicators of quality instruction include accessibility to students; evidence of
course development; innovation; aspects of student advisement; supervision of independent
study; service on master’s, PhD or project committees; manifested presence in department;
and interaction with students in extra-classroom settings (experiential learning activity).
Other activities include facilitating the experiential learning of students through such
activities as supervision of field trips, internships, and student community engagement,
both on and off campus.
Peers must use specifiable criteria in evaluating teaching. Peers will respect the need for a
diversity of personalities, strengths, teaching styles, and approaches to teaching.
Where utilized, student evaluations of faculty teaching will proceed in accordance with the
following policies:
1. Departmental committees will give full credence to methods of teaching evaluation
in addition to SIRs.
2. A single standard form, such as the SIR II published by the Educational Testing
Service, will be utilized but may include optional items as devised by the instructor
and approved by the department.
3. The instrument is to be administered by someone other than the instructor on whom
the evaluation is being completed. The person who administers the evaluation will
return the evaluations directly to the department administrative assistant. The
instructor is not to be present in the class at the time the forms are filled out. Results
will be processed by the testing service but shall not be released until all grades have
been turned in.
4. The results will be simultaneously received by the instructor and the department
chair. The results will include the written comments of students.
5. Data based on student evaluations do not tell the complete story. Peers will evaluate
such data in the context of the capabilities, interests, and aptitude of students; the
academic rigor of the subject matter; and objectives of the department.
Page 2 of 5
All pre-tenured faculty members should maintain an annual "Portfolio of Teaching
Materials” in an attempt to contribute to the evaluation process. These portfolios should
contain material such as copies of exams, course syllabi, study guides, etc, and will be made
available to all committees involved in the evaluation of pre-tenured faculty. These
portfolios are recommended as part of the evaluation package for tenured faculty members
who are applying for promotion or who wish to demonstrate meritorious teaching
performance to the department's Personnel Committee.
All submitters must request the teaching portion be weighted between 20% – 80% of their
overall evaluation.
III. Research/Publication/Creative Activity -- Evaluative Criteria and Standards
of Performance
Applied research, publication activities, and creative activities within the interdisciplinary
areas represent a meaningful component of the evaluation of faculty performance within
the Built Environment Department. These activities constitute key inputs into evaluations
which are made on an annual basis as well as those concerning promotion and tenure.
In multidisciplinary areas like Built Environment with well-developed subfields (such as
safety management, construction management, and interior architecture design), the general
area of research/publication/creative activity accomplishments can be useful in facilitating
the evaluation process. The framework is based on general criteria applied within the Built
Environment discipline as a whole.
The following activities will be considered in evaluation of research/publication/creative
activity accomplishments:














Books
Major grant project (based on award by external funding agency)
Article in a refereed academic journal
Chapter in a book (book published or contracted)
Consultant/applied research reports appropriate to their academic or professional area
of competence
Creative presentation
Monographs or other appropriate media
Article in a non-refereed academic journal (published or accepted)
Service learning project with the intent to publish
Creative Application of software
Formal academic paper presented at a recognized professional conference
Book review (published in or accepted by an academic journal)
Significant external grant submissions
Contracts that exhibit an applied research theme
Development of an online course
The above listing is not intended to be all inclusive, nor is the order in which items are listed
intended to rank one of more importance than another.
All submitters must request the research/publication/creative activity portion be weighted
between 10% – 50% of their overall evaluation.
Page 3 of 5
IV. Service Activities -- Evaluative Criteria and Standards of Performance
Faculty in the Built Environment provide service in many areas such as delivery of practical
applications of knowledge plus service to the university, college, and department. Also, as
public employees, we are called upon often to solve problems in industry, government, and
other educational organizations making use of our various areas of expertise.
We want to appreciate and reward a diverse set of service commitments. The department
subscribes to an initial grouping of service into university, profession, and community
headings. Illustrative examples of activities under each heading are listed as follow:
University
 Serving as an academic advisor for students
 Chairing or performing a task for an active committee within the Built Environment
Department
 Serving on or chairing an interdepartmental, college-wide, or university-wide standing
committee, task force, or other short duration group with a specific goal and/or
measurable objective
 Performing a function or fulfilling an office which includes an extra-departmental
component
 Undertaking extra-campus promotion of an academic or other program or major event
(or event series) for the university
 Other university activities that can be documented with deliverable evidence
Profession
 Serving as an editor or referee for a scholarly journal
 Participating on an evaluation panel for a research funding organization
 Serving as officer or active board member of a professional organization
 Reviewing a manuscript for a publisher or journal editor
 Serving as organizer, discussant and/or panel chair for a panel or section at a
professional conference
 Other professional activities that can be documented with deliverable evidence
Community
Community service activities must be directly related to the faculty member's
professional expertise and responsibilities. Thus, as is the case with research/publication
activities, these community service activities must be grounded in the discipline or
related interdisciplinary areas.
 Undertaking leadership or active membership in a committee or organization
extending beyond the university, such as an advisory board
 Providing information or analysis for a notable or group, an official or officials, or a
media outlet or outlets
 Participating in or leading a program or workshop for an organization, group etc.
 Performing a consulting or training duty for a public, civic, or industrial organization
In the service area, the quantification and qualification issue is problematic. Relative to the
mission of the institution, we begin with the premise that service is equally important to that
of research and teaching. We believe that no portfolio is complete without some sort of
service commitment and that the necessity of substantiation is important.
Page 4 of 5
We have provided a listing of activities in the expectation that personal listings will be
made. Note that if "quality" were equal, more, rather than fewer, activities would be
preferred. In addition, evidence of "quality" (including, presumptively, such indicators as
"time spent on task," progress reports, and various items of intermediate and final written
output) may also be submitted and would weigh in both merit and sufficiency calculations.
All submitters must request the service portion be weighted between 10% – 50% of their
overall evaluation.
V. Other University Assignment
When mutually beneficial to the department and the faculty member, a faculty member
can be “bought out” to render services for 100% of the allotted time. During this timeframe
the requirement for service, research, and teaching will be consumed by the reallocation of
time. The details of the agreement will be documented and communicated to faculty
members in a departmental meeting. The agreement will include the starting and ending
dates and details of deliverables.
VI. Categories of Activity Weight Ranges
The categories of activity have the following weight ranges established by the Department
of Built Environment:




Teaching – 20%-80%
Research/Publication/Creative Activity – 10%-50%
Service – %10-50%
Other University Assignments – 0%-100%
All submitters must request consideration for evaluation within the designated ranges with a
combined weight of 100%.
(approved March 2013)
Page 5 of 5